Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

From The Onion. Too funny. (thanks, Julie, for sending this to me)


Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

New James Bond: Quantum of Solace

This looks good.

And I completely randomly came across this:

Craig wants gay Bond scene
03/12/2006 - 15:40:31

Daniel Craig is urging movie bosses to revolutionise the James Bond franchise by including a gay scene involving the superspy in the follow-up to Casino Royale.

The heart-throb actor has also reportedly told studio chiefs he is prepared to film a full frontal nude scene to please both his male and female admirers.

He says: "Why not? I think in this day and age, fans would have accepted it.

"I mean, look at Doctor Who - that has had gay scenes in it and no one blinks an eye."

Yes, please.
(Dr. Who doesn't actually have "gay scenes" in it, although it does have a random gay, or at least, not so straight, character once in awhile.)

Family Equality video project

The Family Equality Council is a group that "works to ensure equality for LGBT families by building community, changing hearts and minds, and advancing social justice for all families". I got this e-mail from them today about an interesting project they're doing in light of the anti-gay ballot initiatives that passed across the country on Tuesday.

UPDATE: Did I remember to do this for my family? Of course not.

November 6, 2008

Dear Families and Friends,

Today is a bittersweet moment for the LGBT community, our families and friends. The first presidential candidate to directly address LGBT family issues, Senator Barack Obama, has now become President-Elect Obama. What this means for our families’ health and happiness and the future of our movement for family equality is enormously positive.

But we also bore witness to disappointing losses with the passage of Prop 102, the Arizona marriage ban; Amendment 2, the Florida marriage ban; Act 1, the Arkansas foster and adoption ban; and now, as of today, Prop 8, the initiative to eliminate the right to marry for same-sex couples in California.

These votes hurt our families deeply and impact how we nurture and protect each other. I know right now many of you are angry, frustrated, scared and not knowing what to do. But we have to remain focused on the future, on the needs of our kids and on demanding the dignity and rights our families deserve.

The Family Equality Council has created a number of resources to help you talk about this election and to channel your emotions into forward movement for change.

Starting today, we are asking families and friends across the country to submit photos of themselves holding signs declaring their equality. To find out more about this new campaign, DECLARE YOUR FAMILY EQUAL, visit our website at www.familyequality.org. We're going to create a video next week of the photos you submit and share it with the world so that while everyone is watching, waiting for us to react, they can see how strong, how beautiful, how truly resilient our families are.

The deadline for submitting photos to be included in the video is soon -- Sunday, November 9, 11:59pm EST. We want to create this video and start sharing it with the world as fast as we can. You can submit your photos and more at www.familyequality.org.

With all that has happened in the last few weeks, especially in the last few days, we here at Family Equality Council want you to know that our mission has not changed and our determination to ensure equality for LGBT families is only strengthened by these setbacks.

Let's put all our emotions to work creating the world our children deserve.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Chrisler
Executive Director
Family Equality Council

Post-Election Ramblings

It’s over. I can’t believe it. Eight years. Eight years of having all of my beliefs thrown in my face by George Bush. Eight years of “faith-based” initiatives, a completely irrational war against a country that was never a threat to us, the steady chipping away at constitutional rights, the expansion of a far-right judiciary, crony-run government, rampant anti-intellectualism, you name it.

Words can’t even express how relieved I am. When I hear the words “President-elect Obama,” I still can’t believe it. Somehow I wouldn’t allow myself to believe it could actually happen. After the hideous disappointments of 2000 and 2004, a part of me still refused to believe a Democrat could actually win. Gore should have won in 2000, but he lost due to his own missteps and the Supreme Court (it shouldn’t have come down to a few hundred votes in Florida to begin with). Kerry should have won in 2004 since Bush was a disaster, and Kerry was perfectly presentable. But somehow he let the Republicans Swift-boat our chance away. If a Democrat couldn’t win this year, when could they? If they’d lost, they should’ve just packed up and disbanded.

I almost feel sorry for McCain. He picked the worst year for a Republican to run for president. But he couldn’t wait, could he? He’ll be too old in four years. There wasn’t that much talk about his age, really, but I noticed the only demographic to vote overwhelmingly for McCain was the over-65 group. (I’m sure Obama’s race was a factor there also.) I personally thought that McCain was too old. Another fact about McCain that I never saw mentioned was his height. He’s only 5’ 7”! He’s the same height as me! Do short people ever win the presidency? I think I read an article once that said the taller candidate always wins. This makes sense, because a taller person just looks more presidential, commands more authority. It’s just human nature. In the debates, Obama looked much more presidential than McCain. McCain mainly seemed old and cranky, not to mention disrespectful of Obama, who was never less than courteous.

Obama's got this

Funny cats

Sorry, but this is funny, plus the big orange cat looks like mine.


more animals

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA!

AP – President-elect Barack Obama smiles as he gives his acceptance speech at Grant Park in Chicago Tuesday …

I Voted

I voted at approximately 1:15 pm at Fort Hunt Elementary School in Alexandria, VA. No lines! You could choose to vote on a paper ballot or on a machine. I chose a paper ballot because I don't trust the machines. There was only one thing to vote on other than President, Senator and Congressperson, something to give the parks more money. Yes, fine, who could argue against that? After filling out the ballot, I put it in a scanner, which immediately showed that it had scanned one more ballot. It showed a total of 587 at that time.

One curious thing. The Virginia Board of Elections adopted this policy recently, and it was prominently posted in several spots at my polling place.

The phrase, “it shall be unlawful for any person... to...exhibit... other campaign material”
within the Code of Virginia, § 24.2-604 shall be interpreted as:

No person shall show, display, or exhibit any material, object, item, advertisement, or piece
of apparel, which has the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly
identified candidate or issue.

Any person who does so shall be asked by the officers to cease from showing, displaying or
exhibiting the material, object, item, advertisement, or piece of apparel, or to remove or
cover it until they leave the prohibited area and polling place.

Nothing in this policy shall prohibit any person from bringing but not exhibiting any
campaign material within 40 feet of any entrance of any polling place.

It seems to me that wearing a T-shirt with a candidate's name on it hardly constitutes electioneering. I think this is probably a First Amendment violation. I know the ACLU of VA asked the State Board not to adopt this policy, but I don't know whether they filed a lawsuit to prevent its passage or enforcement. Maybe more on that later if I find out more. I just wonder why the State Board of Elections took such a hard stance. Who cares if someone's wearing an Obama or McCain T-shirt while they're voting? The party reps standing outside the polling place said people were wearing buttons and no one asked them to take them off. I'm going to find out more about this because I really think this is wrong.

UPDATE: I can't find anything about a lawsuit. The ACLU wrote the State Board of Elections a letter, but that's it, apparently. Here's the letter. The most interesting part of the letter is this:

The law in Virginia is obviously intended to ban electioneering in the polling place, not silent, passive personal political statements,” added Willis [ACLU VA director]. “We believe that the state has nothing to fear by allowing individuals to wear political buttons and t-shirts in polling places, that it is consistent with the constitutional right of free speech to protect such expression and, frankly, that registrars and poll workers have a lot more important things to do on Election Day than to monitor voters’ clothing.”

The ACLU’s letter also points out that the draft policy is likely to cause a great deal of confusion on Election Day because it implies the need to draw distinctions between expression in support of a particular candidate and more generalized political advocacy, a line that is often hard to draw even in court cases. For example, while a “Vote for Obama” or “Vote for McCain” button would clearly be prohibited under the proposed policy, it is unclear whether a pro- or anti-George Bush button or t-shirt with a donkey or elephant symbol on it would be allowed.

Sweeps Month on TV: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

OK, so the fate of the world rests on the results of tomorrow's election. Let's talk about TV!

I won't be watching these TV shows in November, which allegedly are supposed to attract viewers during sweeps month:

- "Blush: The Search for the Next Great Makeup Artist" (Lifetime)

- "Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work" (PBS). They work?

(A commenter on my LiveJournal page said this: "Yes they do, some of them even have jobs, mostly they have official engagments - dedicate this, open that, vist this, launch this ship, review that regiment, entetrain this head of state and they do charity work, lots of it." It still sounds boring. And PBS seems to think its audience is obsessed with the royals.)

- "WETA's Guide to Christmas" (PBS) A tour of holiday preparations and activities across the D.C. area. Snore.

- "Super-Manny" (ABC) "Supernanny" spinoff. Is that really necessary?

OK, now here are some shows I'd definitely like to watch:

-"Brotherhood" (Showtime) From TV. com: "Brotherhood, a Showtime original series, follows the lives of two brothers in the Providence, Rhode Island Irish-American neighborhood known as “The Hill”. The blue-collar neighborhood has roots in old-world ways of street justice and shady dealings. Tommy Caffee (Jason Clarke) is a family man and local politician who is out to protect the community and its best interests. His world is turned around when his gangster brother Mike (Jason Isaacs) returns to “The Hill” to regain control of the seedy underworld."

This show has already had two seasons that I missed. I'd really like to catch up with it. It sounds vaguely like The Sopranos.





- "24: Redemption" (Fox). 24 hasn't been on TV in so long! This is a 2 hr prequel to the upcoming Season 7. My question is, can 24 redeem itself from its not so great Season 6? Also, it sounds like there will be a completely different set-up for Jack Bauer's relentless intensity. I read somewhere (sorry, can't remember where) that they've jettisoned the Los Angeles CTU (Counter Terrorism Unit), which was the base for all the prior seasons. Hard to imagine 24 without CTU. Does that mean no Chloe, Jack's tech whiz buddy at CTU? She pulled him out of an awful lot of fixes. Or was she actually killed in the last season and I've forgotten because it's been so long? (that's a distinct possibility)

Gay trivia: Cherry Jones, out lesbian primarily known for her Broadway and other theater roles, will play the new American President on 24. I wonder if this is the first time a gay or lesbian actor has played a President? (scurrying off to Google - how would you format that search I wonder?)

Personal trivia: My brother bears more than a passing resemblance to Kiefer Sutherland, who plays Jack Bauer.

From the Fox website: "Filmed on location in Cape Town, South Africa, and Los Angeles, 24: REDEMPTION stars Emmy Award winner Kiefer Sutherland along with new cast members Cherry Jones, Robert Carlyle, Gil Bellows and Academy Award winner Jon Voight. After sacrificing everything for his country, Jack Bauer (Sutherland) is wanted by the U.S. government and now stands to lose the only thing he has left: his freedom. Working as a missionary in Africa, Bauer is called upon to stop a ruthless warlord from drafting innocent children into his murderous militia. First, Bauer must confront his own torturous past and face an impossible decision that will change his life forever. A decision that will set the stage and raise the stakes for Season Seven, which debuts in January 2009."

Did I read that right? Jack's working as a missionary? Yeah, that's plausible. Then again, believability isn't this show's strong suit.

Here's the trailer:

Obama's Position on Gay Marriage is Disturbing

“If Elected: Hopefuls Differ as They Reject Gay Marriage”, New York Times, Nov. 1, 2008.

I’m a supporter of gay marriage. I have a same-sex partner and children, so the issue directly affects me. I’ve never looked carefully at Barack Obama’s position on gay marriage. I’ve always supported him and knew I would vote for him in the primary and, with luck, the general election. His position on gay marriage was not going to change my mind on that score. However, this article in yesterday’s New York Times gives me pause. The article describes Obama and McCain’s positions on gay marriage and why they hold them. I knew that Obama opposed gay marriage and this didn’t surprise me. I don’t think any candidate for national office could support gay marriage and expect to be elected in this country, sadly. But apparently his reasons for not supporting it are religious and I find that kind of disturbing. I suppose because it seems irrational. And Obama seems supremely rational – that’s one of the things I love about him (after 8 years of irrational floundering in the White House). But you can’t reason with “God”. It’s like passing the buck, particularly for an attorney and former constitutional law professor.

According to the article, “Mr. Obama believes that marriage is a sacred union, a blessing from God, and one that is intended for a man and a woman exclusively”. This just seems very inconsistent with his generally liberal views. I’m a little skeptical that his position is simply politically advantageous rather than sincerely held. I’m not sure what to think about the whole thing. Anyway, if one believes in gay rights, that people shouldn’t be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, that people should be able to realize the full potential of their lives, including long-term committed relationships and procreation, why does Obama believe that “God” suddenly draw the line at “marriage”? It’s even more strange when you consider that his own parents were personally affected by anti-miscegenation laws that prevented them from marrying in certain states. The article quotes Obama as saying “Look, when my parents got married in 1961, it would have been illegal for them to be married in a number of states in the South...So, obviously, this is something that I understand intimately. It’s something that I care about.” The article goes on to say that, “At that point, [Obama} veered onto legal rights, saying that — both in 1961 and today — it was more important to fight for nondiscrimination laws and employment protections than for marriage.”

Well, in my opinion, that’s fudging it a bit. That issue goes more to tactics rather than being a rationale for not believing in gay marriage. It’s certainly legitimate to argue that now is not the time to fight for gay marriage. But what Obama is saying is that, for him, that time will never come, he doesn’t believe in gay marriage.
Going back to the religious basis for Obama’s position, the article describes an encounter Obama had with a lesbian: “In one of his books, “The Audacity of Hope,” however, Mr. Obama describes a conversation with a lesbian supporter who became upset when he cited his religious views to explain his opposition. “She felt that by bringing religion into the equation, I was suggesting that she, and others like her, were somehow bad people,” he wrote. “I felt bad, and told her so in a return call. As I spoke to her, I was reminded that no matter how much Christians who oppose homosexuality may claim that they hate the sin but love the sinner, such a judgment inflicts pain on good people.”

Well, duh. And I agree. The “hate the sin, love the sinner” argument is utter crap and completely hypocritical. So...Obama, what gives? How does he square this “God” argument with his reasoning mind, or is he just a typically hypocritical politician who actually does support gay marriage, but isn’t about to say that publicly?

And McCain? Who really cares? Hopefully all of his positions will be moot after Tuesday.

Election Call to Action

Another missive from guest blogger, Dr. Carla Seal-Wanner, who's up in New Hampshire getting out the vote, even as we speak:

Red, White, and Black and Blue all over? Not this time…

The psychic bruises McCain and Palin are inflicting on citizens in the path of their campaign march are proof that they will put America last to win this election. By delivering desperate fear-mongering speeches filled with attempts to defame Obama’s character, misrepresent his policies and values, and even incite racial animus; McCain, Palin and their surrogates are destructively exploiting the basest “red and blue” cultural divisions in America. Despite how much is at stake at this moment in our country’s history, they undermine the critical domestic and international concerns that unify us as a nation, by perpetuating the clash of cultures, values and worldviews. Their hate filled campaign rhetoric is insulting to voters who have moved beyond the negative stereotypes used to win elections in the past by pitting Americans against each other.

As a reasonably savvy life-long political activist I did not expect this of John McCain. But, as the McCain-Palin spectacle of hatred and deception has unfolded to reveal the demagogic tone of his campaign, I was reminded of the closing statement in the late David Foster Wallace’s devastatingly insightful Rolling Stone article about John McCain’s failed bid for the presidency in 2000, McCain’s Promise.* Wallace describes the multiple examples of the candidate’s attempts to deceive voters that led him to suspect McCain’s integrity. He concludes by admonishing us to consider if “the man behind the curtain” riding on the Straight Talk Express is not just a very bad wizard but also a very bad man. “Whether he’s (McCain) truly for real now depends less on what is in his heart than what might be in yours. Try to stay awake.”

With less than a week to go before votes are cast for our next president, my eyes are so wide open watching his campaign devolve into partisan win-at-all-cost practices, I may have to have them surgically corrected to resume their normal width after November 4th. Yet, like Dorothy who came to her senses in Oz just in time to realize it was not the ruby slippers she needed to send her home, but simply the recognition that she was manipulated by a wizard that never had her best interest at heart, I think voters across the country are waking up, clicking their heels together and remembering: there is no place like home. Home in America USA, the divisive tactics of the McCain campaign are backfiring.

The lies suggesting that Obama is unpatriotic, dishonest about his religious affiliation, influenced by radical domestic terrorists, embraces socialist economics, and perpetuates voter fraud have resulted in mobilizing thousands of volunteers to join his Campaign for Change. Citizens of all ages and walks of life are on the campaign trail spreading healing salve on the bruises inflicted by these smears. Reaching out to fellow citizens, they implore voters to stay focused on what truly matters – leadership that will bring us unity, peace and prosperity. Their tireless effort is aimed at solidifying votes cast for a president, vice president, senators, congressmen and woman who celebrate our diversity as strength not weakness.

As an educator, mother, and grandmother my nervous system has been in overdrive since the outset of this presidential election. As a fully wired early Obama supporter, I have stayed informed on the issues, joined campaign initiatives to spread his message of HOPE and CHANGE, made donations and participated in fundraising. During the primary, as both the Clinton and Republican campaigns waged Rovian attacks on Obama’s character I ramped up my involvement and contributions. In the general election, since McCain put Palin on his ticket, I worried these efforts to ensure that our country evolves from the damaging economic, domestic and foreign policies of the Bush-era may not be enough. So, I caved in to this anxiety, put work and family demands on hold until after November 4th and went to the battleground state of New Hampshire to campaign for Obama.

This is not an unselfish act. I could not live with myself if I did not do everything possible to elect the leader that America desperately needs to keep us on an evolutionary track. A different outcome could send America back to an unenlightened 20th Century mindset about everything from our foreign policy, equal opportunity and individual rights to the scientific understanding needed to keep our species and planet in good health.

Many share this anxiety. I have met union members, teachers, CEO’s, small business owners, students from high school to graduate school, house wives and house husbands, Democrats and fallen-Republicans who have joined grassroots campaigns across the country. Turns out it is empowering to stand up to deceptive, cynical campaign tactics aimed at tearing American down rather than building it up! Who knew that citizens who have real hopes and dreams for America could accomplish so much? Oh, yeah … community organizers know that!

So, stay awake and make history. Prove that the way to put American first is to demonstrate that HOPE is alive and well in our nation of immigrants. Don’t wait for Toto to pull the curtain back for you or stop to take a nap in a field of poppies. The world is watching to see if America will put America first this time.

*Now published in an unexpurgated book version: McCain’s Promise, Back Bay Books, June, 2008.


Dr. Carla Seal-Wanner, children’s educational media expert, formerly Director of Columbia University’s Graduate Program in Instructional Technology and Media, current Education Director of ClimateCartoons.org.

How to Talk like a Southerner

This is so true. Although not a native, I've lived in the South for a long time (although I don't think the D.C. suburbs of Northern Virginia really qualify as Southern - but before that I lived in Atlanta for a long time, which come to think of it, a lot of Georgians would argue isn't really Southern either!). In my personal observation, the following is completely accurate. Nothing marks Southern female speech as much as "bless your heart." (Although leave a comment if you disagree.)

Dahlia Lithwick in Slate yesterday Bless Their Hearts: In the battle for a changing Virginia, Democrats may be changing faster than Republicans:

Standing outside the stunning beaux-arts lobby of Richmond's legendary Jefferson Hotel in August, I struck up a conversation with a woman who—noticing my not-from-here accent—offered what she described as the golden rule of talking like a Virginian. In her 50s or 60s, impeccably dressed, and racing to make a dinner reservation at one of the tony restaurants in the city's historic Shockoe Slip, she patiently explained: "If you want to sound like a real Virginian, you just say, 'Bless your heart' after every single sentence. Doesn't matter how mean it is! You just turn to your hairdresser and say, 'I hate this goddamn, stupid haircut, bless your heart,' and you're from Virginia!